Cut out your smoking breaks and get an extra day off.

Fair trade? The answer is probably largely based on how coveted those smoke breaks are for you.

The people at smoke-break.org however, have started a movement claiming that smoking breaks are costing the economy millions of productivity hours a year. Not an outlandish claim (but largely debatable) - and they want to reward people for NOT taking smoking breaks. Their pitch: Cut out your smoke breaks... or keep NOT taking them... and get an extra vacation day.

They theorize that if you are taking 4 smoke breaks a day, at 10 minutes/break, then you are spending 3 1/2 hours a week puffing. That translates into 175 hours a year. That's more than 4 full weeks! So, says Smoke-Break.org, if you choose not to smoke, it's a win-win for health and business... and they are going to get you an extra day off.

Umm... okay. How? Well, the smoke-break folks aren't exactly clear on that - other than they say they need lots of followers to join together to send a message to corporations.

I'm not a "smoker" (I'd define a "smoker" as someone who lights one up on a normal basis, without any liquor in them - just so we're clear). In fact, no one in our office is a "smoker". However, we continually see smokers outside of our office window throughout the day. It would be a nice break 3 or 4 times a day - if, of course, I was a "smoker".

I also understand that there are some people out there who simply need their fix 3-4 times a day. And if they can't smoke inside, who am I to to say they can't go outside and do it? For instance - I love chocolate mini-donuts (Mickey's, to be exact) - and I know they aren't good for me. But I can sit at my desk and down those things all day. They are only making numero-uno chunky.

So, on the one hand, it seems that employers have a responsibility to keep breaks even for all employees, but at the same time allowing smokers to do what they need to do.

Would you implement a program that gave people a day off for NOT taking smoke breaks?